Re: [GD-General] Eiffel

[J C L. <cl...@ka...>]

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001 16:57:37 -0800 
Brian Hook <bri...@py...> wrote:

>> At my last job (yeah, I'm hunting) the tool chain was Windows
>> only so until we got everything running under WINE under Linux
>> (which ran it faster than native Windows on the same box) I did
>> all my compiles under SSH to a Windows box.  Worked fairly nicely
>> too.

> So I'm assuming you don't pursue jobs where you're required to use
> their tool chain, no exceptions?  

Depends on what you mean by toolchain.  Compilers, linkers, etc --
things that actually produce the product they're paying me for --
that's the employer's purview and is part of the product definition.
Toolchains in terms of editors, tools, systems, etc, has nothing to
do with my employer (tho maybe something to do with IS).

  Then again, I don't think I've seen a company that asked let alone
  required their employees to all use the same editor/tool/system
  etc since 1988 (I hear they still exist) -- well, not outside
  places like Sun/SGI/HP asking you to use Solaris/IRIX/HP-UX as the
  base OS (ie eat your own dogfood -- and they didn't insist and
  made no mention as to what you ran atop that).  They just want to
  know that what you produce works in the product and can be worked
  with by everyone else in the team/group.

> I've actually interviewed people before that said they wouldn't,
> for example, use Windows (or give up Emacs...or use Visual Source
> Safe..or conform to other people's coding styles).  

I won't work under Windows.  Not worth my time.  Not worth my
employer's time.  Can't see a reason to bother.  Not a religious
thing -- its just an environment which I consider and find
excessively difficult to be productive under, and without any return
value for that difficulty.

  Much like a carpenter or mechanic brings his own tools with him to
  the job, I bring my own tools with me to my job as a developer.

What I will do is adapt/conform on my interfaces to the rest of the
company and the people and systems I work with.  If there are
shared/communal systems/approaches which are required, that's not a
problem.  I'll plug into their source control system, their coding
styles, their shared file systems, etc.  No problem.  If the local
coding is too much of a pain and difficult for me to read/work with,
well, then that's what software is for; it covers up the gaps and
handles the translations (wrap a copy of indent around the check-in
process).

ObNote:  Most of the better shops I've been at have adopted the
coding format of:

  -- Everything within a given file must use the same style.  If you
  edit a file, copy what's there.

  -- Everything within a directory/module should use the same style.
  If you add a file, copy what's there already.

  -- If you do something new, write your own module ets, use
  whatever you want so long as its consistent.

  -- We like it if you use JavaDoc or (insert comment documentation
  system).

This is especially nice when they also embed the coding style in a
modeline comment so that your editor can pickup and reconfigure
itself for the local style transparently as you enter each file.

> There's nothing wrong with that, mind you, so long as you're in a
> position to make those demands.

I suspect this is a demographic difference between Windows and *nix
oriented shops.  I hear/read about Windows shops attempting to
dictate use of developer tools like editors, IDEs, and the like.  I
just haven't seen or heard that in any world I work in for a very
long time (and have a hard time understanding why they'd bother).

-- 
J C Lawrence                
---------(*)                Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas. 
cl...@ka...               He lived as a devil, eh?		  
http://www.kanga.nu/~claw/  Evil is a name of a foeman, as I live.